Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Staff Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff survey shows gains in engagement and board support; discipline and building communication flagged for improvement
Summary
Manitowoc staff survey for 2024-25 recorded 476 responses (51% participation) and overall positive movement on measures of engagement and leadership support, while discipline consistency and building-level communication were identified as areas needing work.
Get email alerts on the Staff Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Manitowoc School District administrators presented results of the 2024-25 staff survey at a special meeting, reporting 476 responses and a 51 percent participation rate. District staff highlighted multiple positive shifts in staff experience and engagement, and identified building-level communication and consistent discipline practices as priorities for follow-up.
Mike, a district staff member who presented the results, said the survey closed Dec. 17 and produced a 51 percent participation rate with 476 responses. The presentation noted that 45 percent of respondents had five or fewer years of service in the district; the presenter argued that this underscores the need for instructional coaching and support for early-career teachers.
Key positive changes cited by the presenter included a 13 percent increase in respondents who rated academic teaching effectiveness positively and a 32 percent positive change on one discipline-related measure. The district also reported strong agreement with statements that "the school board is doing what it takes to make our district successful" and that district administration is setting the right direction; both items were among the five areas with the most growth. The presenter said 89 percent of respondents agreed that staff do a good job educating students, though that figure was slightly down from the prior survey.
Areas identified for improvement were consistent building-level communication from administrators, consistent handling of discipline, and the perception of supervisor support; access to technology also showed a small decline from the prior year. The presenter said building-level results can be disaggregated so administrators can identify which schools logged the lower scores and use those results to set building goals.
Board members asked whether written comments were available and whether the district had used the same survey vendor in prior years. Mike said written comments exist (about 800 in a past administration) and the district has used the same vendor previously; he said staff could circulate the written comments to the board. Mike also said the executive team would need to determine next steps for sharing results and setting priorities at the building level.
In question-and-answer remarks board members recommended communicating results to building administrators and staff, using school-level data to set goals, and following up with concrete actions so future participation remains strong. Presenters and board members noted that participation had been higher in a prior year (approximately 59 percent) and that timing of the survey can affect response rates. The board was reminded of upcoming committee meetings where survey results and personnel items will be discussed.

